Benj, Your take on the viewfinders is interesting. As an old Leica user, I had in hand a system of (vintage) Leica lenses. I was completely sure I was going to buy a Typ 240 until I saw the X-Pro3's finder! It humiliated the Leica's for my glasses-wearing eyes. Brighter, sharper, a mile of eye relief, a ton of space outside the bright lines that I could actually use, built-in diopter adjustment, as many or as few informational icons as you want, correction for angle-of-view change with (much closer) focus distance.... it was not a short list of advantages. It handed the Leica finder a doleful drubbing. And the finder is what these cameras are about. I bought the Fuji. ----- Yeah, the Fuji's finder is .52, compared to .73 for the M10. That may be a major thing for you. And it's clearly what you are used to. But we should remember why it is that Leica finders are mostly in the .71-ish range. It's not that Leica thinks that glasses wearers not being able to see the 28mm lines at all and having to shift around to see the corners of the 35mm lines is a good thing so much as it's about the rangefinder. Viewfinder magnification determines effective rangefinder base as well as how clearly the user can see the patch. South of .7, focusing 90s becomes a bit dodgy. Which might be why Leica no longer offers a .58 finder option. Absent the focusing limitations, I'll bet a Fuji-ish .58 option would be pretty popular. ------- Then there's the matter of this manual focusing thing. The Fuji doesn't even have manual focusing in OVF mode, in any practical sense. The only way you can focus the Fuji for-real manually is "groundglass" style - when you are using the camera as an SLR. (Or in that little display in the corner of the finder. Which is still "groundglass, SLR-style" focusing.) You could fairly compare that to using the Visoflex, I suppose. But why bother, because the whole point of these cameras is the optical finder and what that means to freeing your mind to worry about stuff that matters instead of focusing. Real-world, "manually" putting the patch on the subject and pressing the button until it turns green then re-composing or lining up the patch and then re-composing seem like pretty similar methods to me. Even though one technically is "autofocus" and one isn't. If you want to talk about "manual" focusing, those two methods are what you would need to compare. I can't say which is "better", BTW. Both have largely the same limitations and both require the photographer to learn some skills. OK, some difficult skills. But there's a point to the effort. The Fuji does have the "bail-out" option of switching to for-real autofocus. That is a thing, but maybe not as big a thing as it sounds. ----- Yes, I'm happy with the Fuji system. All things reasonably equal, it's what I reach for first. I'm certainly not selling it anytime soon. That said, I have been shooting a little film in my Leicas lately. It's fun. As I write this I'm shopping for a 246. Not to replace the Fuji and not for professional reasons, but just for personal, emotional ones.
Another thing re glasses & the XPro that suits me is the ability to wear prescription sunglasses and increase the brightness in the EVF when using zooms, a bonus to this old eye. By the time I'd adjusted a patch system (I have tried) the show would be over.
Fwiw, every review or comparison hopefully brings YEARS if not decades of experience into it all. Completely unbiased reviews just aren’t a thing, but fwiw, I own more Fujifilm cameras than Leica cameras ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@@benjhaisch Well said. A review completely without bias isn't possible, unless you're just simply comparing measured specs, which would be very boring lol. We all have our own experiences and preferences. For the most part I thought this video was reasonably fair, with the only exception to that being Leica winning the lens category, which is pretty laughable (see my other comment for explanation).
I just watched 16 minutes of “I own a Leica, so let me justify my expense.” Two totally different cameras with completely different use cases that really shouldn’t even be compared. But, watched the whole thing, because I like the videos. Keep it up!
@@benjhaisch I think people need to understand that aside from general appearance, these are two completely different tools. Anyway, looking forward to the next one. Take it easy.
I just borrowed one to test it out. I used to have the XPro-1. Hardly used it aside of filming Skateboarding. Rather kept on taking pictures with the M6. Sold the Xpro and got an XH1. Better for filming, and still can mount my Leica lenses. Bought an M8. Didn‘t use it too much, M6 way better. Borrowed a M10, being skeptical, thought it‘s like the M8 but more sophisticated. Weird thing, it feels like my M6. Been shooting it a week and enjoyed it. When switching to the M6 there is no „adapting“. With family there isn‘t that much time for the extensive darkroom work, so I‘m considering on getting an M10-P on the used market. Hardly did any post, really like the look. But yeah, the arguments against it, I truly understand. Still contemplating… 🤷♀️
Why do you wish it were full frame? You can buy a gfx for less than the Leica and have a bigger sensor and more resolution; plus weather sealing and ibis.
Even if it was twice the price of the current X-Pro3, a full frame X-Pro would sell to a lot of photographers who want to adapt their Leica lenses without stretching to the M10 price point.
While I agree on some points, you're definitely biased towards Leica😅Like the experience for instance, usable range for viewfinder on Leica is very limited, shooting wide angle or tele brings no joy, whereas X-Pro can give EVF when you need😉And yeah, giving a point for the whole sensor just because it's bigger, c'mon🤔
I was thinking the same thing when he mentioned that, especially when he talked about 7artisans and TTartisans. They make manual glass specifically for the Fuji X mount.
It is hard to separate the lens category from the focusing category. Leica lenses arguably produce the best images and it is easier to focus Leica glass on a Leica body than on a Fuji one, so from that standpoint Leica wins the lens category. But I see your point.
Fair point, but beware the Fuji M Mount adaptor does have a list of compatible lenses. Some popular Leica focal lengths may not work on your Fujifilm body.
I think you can mount a Nikon AiS lens in a Leica M with very good results, thing is you need to either use Live View or a Visoflex to focus. The OVF of the Leica won't help.
Funny thing is I didn't have to tape the dot, nobody in my family noticed that it's a different camera 🤣 Truth is it's actually my wife who suggest me to sell the Fuji and buy the Leica... 😅😍
I picked up an M-E (later model M9) this past summer and it's been interesting contrasting it against my main workhorse, the X-T3. I thought your comments towards the end hit the nail on the head for my experience; the M-E is no question a more involved, challenging shooting experience. It's reminiscent to me of shooting film, where I need to take more care. It's not how I would choose to shoot everything, which is why I pick it up way less than my X-T3 or X100V, but sometimes I want that highly tactile experience of holding a hunk of brass in my hand, moving a focus tab, and turning metal dials to set my exposure. Using most modern mirrorless cameras is like shooting fish in a barrel. The M-E feels like using the most high-end crossbow ever made. It feels that much more satisfying to produce a great image out of it than *because* it is more challenging. My hope is that at the end of COVID I will be able to take it out and do some street photography and really become adept at using it. It won't be for everyone, but I find it undeniably fun.
I'm glad you brought up depreciation. One of the things people don't consider when evaluating the price of a piece of kit is the rate a depreciation. What you spend on a camera or lens is not the initial purchase amount. It's the initial purchase amount minus the resale value over time. For instance, I bought my XT-2 back in the day for about 700 dollars. I sold it about 8 months later for 650. So, in reality, I only spent 50 dollars on that camera to use it for eight months. WAY cheaper than any rental. This is a huge factor to consider when buying Leica. If you're able to resell it after three years for only a thousand or so less than what you bought it for, then it's actually not that expensive of a purchase. Leica lenses in particular hold their value incredibly well, so you can't really go wrong if you buy one used. Obviously, you have to have the money to make the initial purchase, but it's certainly not a nonsense long-term investment.
There are some case where used Leica lenses are selling for more than their original retail price. I forget which, but I think it might be the Elmarits.
Actually it’s only the Leica glass that holds more value than the bodies. I personally wouldn’t want to pay thousands for an M9 when camera sensors are much better for the same price. Now Leica film camera bodies do hold a better value. I bought an M3 in 2009 for $500 and sold it last year with a misaligned rangefinder for $700. Paying more for a digital sensor doesn’t make sense today unless it was unique which is why I feel in the future, Fuji cameras will have a higher resale value as classic digital cameras than any other company.
@@MGrose407 Funny you bring up the M9 because I happened to pick up one that had a replaced sensor by Leica for about 2100 just 3 days before Leica announced that they were going to stop servicing the M9 entirely and all M9's out there were corroded sensors fate was sealed to forever have corroded sensors. I sold it just a month later for 3000, and that's actually the only reason I did sell it was the price increase.
One thing that I find really cool about my X Pro 2 is the ability to place the focus spot almost anywhere on the frame. When I was shooting film on my M4, especially with a shallow DoF lens like a 90 mm Sumicron, I had to locate the point of interest (e.g. the subject’s eye) at the centre of the frame, focus, then recompose. In a dynamic situation, there might not be time to recompose. Meanwhile, with the Fuji, you can reposition the focus spot with the little joystick and get composition and critical focus all at once! Small thing, but part of the all-important shooting experience. Another thing. I agree totally that manual focus with a focus-by-wire lens sucks. However, if you use a rangefinder lens with an adapter, and the Fuji OVF, the experience is actually pretty good. My only reservation is that my 1970 35 mm Sumicron is softer and noticeably less contrasty than the Fuji f/1.4 35mm. Great if you’re into nostalgia, but not a go-to for my purposes.
Nice comparison. the two cameras look really similar yet the leica still looks much more clean and better. However, for the price of the x-pro 3 you can not even buy a used m 240.😣
I just bought a used X-Pro 3 with 3 lenses for the same price of an M 240. I know the Leica will probably hold its value for longer, but I couldn't be happier with the Fuji, and don't really ever plan on switching over.
You should make a video comparing a Leica camera with a similarly priced Fujifilm camera, something like the M10 vs GFX 100S with a nice GF lens. That would be very interesting to see what you're getting for the SAME price from both brands 🙃
GFX 100s might not be a fair comparison since it’s not a range finder “style” camera. Maybe a GFX50R? It’s a much older GFX that should be a fun video to watch. It’s would be awesome if you can get a M10R too. So it will be a battle of 50’ish mp monsters. I do enjoy your videos. Great contents. Keep it up. I’ll make sure to watch and like.
@@orispace No, the 100s. The best for the best...they discontinued the 50r. This many pixels needs ibis these days.... The 100S images will blow away anything under 10k sold by Leica. Anything.
You summarized it well.. ultimately it is gear love - phrases like “shooting experience”, “makes me want to pick-up and shoot”, “love the way it feels in my hands”, “involving”, “slows me down”, “I have to work it”, “feels like I am doing something”, “love the weight of it”, “love the way it looks”, “Leica pop” all of this tells me it is really is all about human-camera interaction and preferences. Well, I hope you compare it it an old Fuji GFX 50r (to keep the rangefinder-esque criteria), a Leica would still score on OVF and perhaps design with experience split right in the middle, objectively speaking.
Great video. Started to shoot Leica a year ago with a Q2 and got sucked into the Leica ecosystem completely. Since then I love the M line and still see shooting with it 10 times as often compared to other much more advanced cameras. I fully can understand why people love Fuji. Was thinking about that as well but finally jumped on the Leica train and never regretted it since then. Thanks a lot for your videos. Greetings from Vienna, Austria. Stay safe!
I’m running a Similar camera kit, the previous generations of both cameras from this video. I’m using the M240 and X pro 2, need autofocus and video every now and then, otherwise it would be a Leica only kit.
Worth mentioning Leica M-mount glass can be used on Fuji bodies without issues, but as far as I'm aware, only M-mount lenses can be used on Leica bodies. While I shoot Fuji myself for multiple reasons, I started noticing I'm gravitating more towards fully manual lenses even though I have absolutely no issues with the Fuji prime lenses at all. I'm a huge fan of both of these brands, it seems like both Leica and Fuji want to put the fun back into photography. They're both reviving that nostalgic feeling of shooting with range-finder film-cameras but they achieve this goal with different methods.
The X-Pro 3 has a X-Trans Sensor that is doing very good work with Filmsimulations. I think it's not well thought out to just give the point to the Leica due to the size of the sensor alone.
Very good video! For me the use and being inspired by whatever camera + lens we use is the most important, makes me wanna go out and use more often. Ive bought limited xpro2 graphite 2 weeks ago with 35 1.4 and love that combo for photos and just having fun outside, also got 18-55 zoom to use for other stuff and thats enought for me. I am selling x-t30, 23 & 35 f2, 55-200 - it was good for learning and trying. But xpro2 with 35 1.4 feels more old school and it just affordabale without breaking the bank too. Anyway. Cheers pal.
I have that same brass grip for the X-Pro3 and it’s so sick. Yeah I really wish that Fujifilm would offer lenses that are simply not focus-by-wire. That’s a tall order, I get it, but I would love to have that experience plus more lenses with zone-focusing indicators. I was actually thinking today how dope it would be for Fuji to incorporate an actual rangefinder patch in the next X-Pro model. Or at least firmware updates so we can have a representative “rangefinder” mode for manual focusing, in addition to peak highlights and split image. Tall orders, again, but fun to think out of the box.
Oh, but they did. And a superb one at that; check the 23/1.4. Sure it's slow as molasses so I don't use it even tho I have it. If you want something that is mechanical and of comparable quality get some equivalent Voigtländers. I have a couple of M-X adapters and put my Leica and Voigtländers in my X-Pro2. Superb experience and the focus-peaking is faster even than the Leica patches.
@@jorgemtrevino yes the clutch focus is super cool on that one, the 16mm 1.4, and the 14mm 2.8. It still works as focus-by-wire though. On the note of manual focus lenses, I totally agree. I lobe using my Leica glass on my Fujifilm.
Great video, thanks! I always cringe a bit, though, when people claim to critique design but then just talk about the aesthetics. Aesthetics are a small part of design, but really the core is how the product is used. I.e. how well does it fit in your hand, how’s the button placement, how are the dials, how well does it fit your workflow.
So cool to see you talking about the X-Pro3! I’ve made so many videos about this cam haha...I would love to try the Leica at some point!! Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I really enjoy your channel 😊
I have used both and I believe it first depends your budget as they are both great cameras!!! From all the M numbers, I now use an SL and I truly enjoy the outputs and shooting at ease!!!! Thank you for this!!! When the M14 comes out, Im back to the M and I say goodbye to the SL!!! Cheers
I own three Fuji cameras and recently purchased my first Leica (240). There are things I love about both, but if Fuji could figure out a full frame camera with the same form factor I would be all in on Fuji. Just miss the full frame, but didn’t want to go back to a time when I was carrying around Canon Mark Iv’s
I think for many the prices of Leicas are difficult to grasp/justify especially when they come with so many technological handicaps so to speak but I fully understand what are you driving at in this video having both Leica and Fujifilm systems; that feeling of cooking your own meal as you note is something special and the fact that the cooking utensils you are using are arguably art in themselves makes the feeling even more gratifying and want to cook. First time I've commented on your videos but have been a big fan. Keep it up.
This was an interesting comparison. I'd like to see a video of shooting with the two side by side, commenting on the experience, then comparing the images from the two. I started shooting with Leicas in 1968 and I've had my current M3 for 40 years. My wife feels my best work has been with the Leica and she can look back an pick out the ones taken with it. We were actually in a camera store, I had an M8 in hand and my wife was encouraging me to buy it. I could easily afford it but I just couldn't justify it. While I am very comfortable shooting true rangefinder, it only works best with a narrow range of focal lengths, the Summicron trinity of 35-50-90. Anything outside of that range becomes a challenge. To me the advantage of the X-Pro is you are able to shoot OVF in that range, but you can also go way outside that range and shoot EVF. This is a big advantage of hybrid viewfinders. Yes, the Leica is wonderful, but I can easily hobble along with Fujis at a significant savings. To put my experience in perspective, I have a BFA from Art Center LA and worked for years as a full time professional.
My experience as a photographer for the last 30 years using many different camera brands. In the film days it was first the Minolta Dynax 700i, a fully automatic camera with great eye AF and it had this expansion card system where you could get settings to do certain things. Then I moved onto an Contax G2, ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;Olympus system, then Nikon, then settled with Canon all the way until the first 6D.IT was around the time of the Leica S2 and Leica M8 that I seriously started considering Leica. Now I have a little bias, considering I really wanted a Fuji X Pro 1 when it came out but the store I purchased cameras didn't have any in stock. I got a X-E1. Within a few months, I accidentally dropped the camera and the sensor turned upside down and green. I contacted Fuji, there was nothing they could do. I got so frustrated I went to a local used camera shop and asked if they had a Leica... The rest is as is said, history. I shoot a Leica M, Leica SL2/SL2S, Q, S typ 007 and as well, Lumix, Sigma, Blackmagic and RICOH. I would say 80% of the time I would go to an M and at least consider taking it before any other camera. As you said, the rangefinder (where the actual M comes from, Messsucher) is something that isnt for everyone. However nothing good ever is.
As a Fuji user since the xt1 I was able to try out an m9 for a bit and while that was a truly remarkable experience, it made me anxious to actually use it because of the price point. As much as I love brassing, the idea of accidentally brassing someone else’s camera made my stomach turn. Great videos as always! Keep ‘em coming!
Thanks Benj, great video! But, manual focusing? In my opinion Fuji has the best focus peaking system by far. It is so easy to use it even in dark situations.
I've been shooting Fuji for the last 5 or 6yrs & I love em but I've always had a Leica itch. So I recently scratched that itch with an M8 & boy am I hooked. Now I'm hankering after the M9 Mono. 👍
Great comparison! I own and love my XPro-3. If I was going to buy a camera that I'd keep for 10+ years I'd probably go Leica. However at my age a 10+ year camera is probably not a good investment ;) You did make me realize what a Leica wannabe I am, and what partially drove me to the XProX model to begin with.
I relate to the paying more for a harder experience... I am currently working with an ALPA SWA with a digital back and a film back.... every shot takes a while....
Leica M10 has brought meaning to photography again. Having come a full circle, now I want the simplicity and the joy of being creative. "The liberation of limitation" -Alan Schaller.
I owned both (but with the Leica being typ 240) and I love each of them differently. Btw FYI I bought the M240 based on your video. Great video as always!
Ashley Gilbertson’s work, published in the New York Times, was created on the Fujifilm XPro line and an iPhone. The work is what matters most. If you can create great work with many tools (Fuji, Leica, iPhone etc) ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️🥰 just pick the tool that serves you best in more ways. We have so many excellent choices now. It’s not like the old days where the pricier gear gave you the best results - yay! 🤗🥰🥰🥰🥰
Very interesting commentary. But to be honest, I'm not sure I learned anything. As someone who uses the XPro2 (along with Nikon and Olympus) I can appreciate the quality and nuances that the Leica purports to offer. I'd love to try/own a Leica... but I'd be hard pressed to spend 4X the amount for what the XPro2 can competently deliver. So while I can appreciate all the fine points of a Leica, it really does come down value-for-price proposition for each individual to decide on: is that premium increase in cost worth the experience the price offers. As for long term value, I note that a used XPro2, for example, sells for about $1000 Cdn on eBay, or about 40% of its original selling price 6 years ago. A used Leica M10 sells on eBay for about 50% of its new price. So, Fujis hold their value - at least for these rangefinder-esque models - not too badly either. Finally, I'm not sure all those evaluation categories are equally weighted. If you added a weighting function, the two cameras might come out a lot closer on a normalized basis. For example, yes, battery life is important, but carrying 2 or 3 extra, inexpensive batteries is hardly a deal breaker. :)
You really are a Leica fanboy. The Fuji blows the Leica away. I now both. The lenses for the Fuji are on par or better. The Leica lenses are great but way overpriced. Side by side images the editors I deal with can’t tell the difference.
In Canadian dollars a Leica M10 24mp body and a Summicron 35mmf2 lens is gonna cost $15,000. The XPro3 + Fuji 35mmf1.4 costs about $3,000. This is like comparing a Ferrari to a Volkswagon lol. Nothing wrong with a Fuji nor a VW but if you have horrendous amounts of money to spend then why not an Italian sports car and a luxury camera brand? Oh, BTW the image quality from the Fuji is exceptional and in 90% of all cases as good as the Leica. Leica fan boys feel free to pile on.
I get your point but your comparison is a bit off as Leica has the aesthetic and value of a Ferrari but a power of a Volks... and vice versa for Fuji.. they get you from A to B WAY faster.
I would probably buy an M10 and a 35mm Summicron if I had £10000 to spare as I love the “simple” rangefinder experience. However I bought an M6 and the Voigtlander Nokton which scratches that itch. For digital I have an XPro2 which again satisfies my need for pared back photography, and I love the results. Having said all that, each to their own, use what you love to use
I have an M10 with 35 Lux FLE and 50 Lux asph, and I’ve been thinking about switching to Fuji X Pro3. So called “Leica experience” is hyped by everyone but there are things they don’t tell you, like the stiction on the 50 asph, the 0.7m MFD, the focus shifts, and sometimes the RF focusing is cumbersome when all you want is to just get the shot. I will be selling my Leica system soon.
What an odd comparison. The Leica is better at everything except the features it doesn‘t have and price. Have you tried a manual lens or even an adapted M lens on the Fuji? It makes more sense to conpare them in the same shooting setup. Of course the Fuji has the better AF, and of course the Leica has the better MF experience because that‘s their main focusing method.
I should have picked up an M9 a couple years ago. Prices for copies with a clean or replaced sensor are creeping back over $4k and approaching $5k..... copies with a corroded sensor are still in the $2k-$3k range. Wild... I bought my used GFX 50R for less than that.
Nice comparison, thanks ! I used other brands too but when I tried my first Leica (an M9) I became addicted to the Leica experience :) now use an M10-P, and a Q2 when autofocus is needed
As a Leica user I can say most of this made sense EXCEPT saying that Leica wins in the lens category---that's absolutely ridiculous. If you only had native lenses, then yes, that would be accurate (but it wouldn't be an overwhelming win even with that). But the fact that with Fuji you not only get to use the superb Fuji native lenses (which are very strong performers), but you can ALSO use the Leica lenses, PLUS many other brands of lenses, gives the Fuji the definite win in this category. Suggesting otherwise shows extreme subjective bias not based in facts. Yes, you have the crop factor when using Leica lenses on Fuji, however, this crop factor will actually make many Leica lenses perform BETTER than on the Leica body itself, since you are using the sharpest and cleanest part of the imaging circle. There isn't so much of a difference with Summicrons, which are still reasonably sharp at the edges, but with Summilux lenses there most certainly is.
I like rangefinders for 28-50 focal lengths. For making unprepared photographs quickly, inside or in low light. I want short lenses. SLRs have the other focal lengths covered imho.
@@mynewcolour Personally I prefer rangefinders as well, however the 28-50mm range is extremely well covered by _all_ camera systems. It’s only when you go wider than that you have issues with a larger selection of quality lenses for crop sensors. However, even with that “handicap” there is no shortage of adaptable wide lenses available for Fuji X cameras. I personally use Leica M and other rangefinders, and Panasonic m4/3, which allows even more lens choices. m4/3 does indeed suffer on the wide end though, as native lenses are pretty much the only choice for wides.
Crops sensors are good for zone focused shooting only (for me). For my uses of 28-50mm (for which rangefinder camera bodies are more useful than other systems) I still want some dof control, so a full sensor. We are lucky to have so many options to suit everyone.
Really nice video. I began with a nikon FM2 and Trix during almost 15 years before to switch to digital with the Canon 5D MK2 and 8 years ago, i sold it for Fujifilm with several bodies : XE1/XT1/X30/XPRO2/X100V (all sold then) and now i use the XPRO3 and X100V. ... BUT Leica remains my dream camera this whole time. The M10 series convinces me to jump in and I ordered a M10D a few days ago, can't wait anymore. Your video confirmed my choice ! Thanks
I have the Fuji and have used the Leica for some length of time - it has by far a better overall experience than the Leica which, imho, is overhyped. The other issue with the Leica is that most users will not use it because of how much it costs. I'd much rather have a camera that I am comfortable using day to day than one which has to live in its box. 'claaaaaaw'
Interesting video for two different and highly idiosyncratic cameras. For me, the takeaway is just how highly subjective camera preference is. I have the X-Pro3 which I enjoy very much, particularly when using the ovf to focus on composition. But for people deadset on having a real rangefinder the xpro is no substitute. For me, the other "objective" comparison points are debatable.
do you have much Leica experience? I do not have any fuji experience, but own Nikon, Sony and Leica .... Leica is just the best, so expensive most people will never get the chance to use them... that said, any camera will allow you to be creative and have fun.. take care.
For me, the X-Pro is a bit of a strange halfway house between a mirrorless and a proper rangefinder. I find the X-E series has a more appropriate body size for the sensor, and omits the gimmicks. The X-E4 is also the most minimalist camera you'll find that isn't made by Leica. I'm honestly considering picking one up, mostly for use with manual lenses, both adapted (Helios, Nikon, Leica) and new (7Artisans, TTartisan, Laowa). With the Fuji 27mm it doubles as a compact point & shoot when I need it to as well.
I know this video is old but on the topic of Leicas holding value, I would say that it is a minus just as it is a plus. Much of the older lenses hold value because the mount is the same and Leica users will buy less sharp, more flawed lenses because it gives them what they feel is a "leica look" and "character" as well as simply because some have the money to be collectors of rare lenses. Of course the lenses themselves were well made for their time to begin with. As for the value of M bodies, these hold because Leica is so slow at updating for obvious reasons. If the difference between an M9 and an M11 is 3 generations of bodies or chassis with only 2 real bumps in MP count between the 13-14 years of manufacturing, of course the older ones will still hold some value. They're at the very least 70% of the package of the newest and greatest M. I understand this is because Leica users are notoriously picky about remaining in the past as long as possible because that's why they bought a leica in the first place, but I hope people realize that it's not JUST because the M bodies are somehow magical in their qualities. It's that they haven't changed very much at all since they first released. A 10 year old loaf of bread could probably hold value if it wasn't very different from fresh bread.
If you can't afford a m10, the xpro3 is a brilliant alternative. I would definitely choose it over the PASM stuff out there, for sure. Now that Voigtlander is making Fuji lenses, tossing one on a xpro is a fantastic bit of street kit. Until you can buy a Leica, at least.
my question: is there a single lens that can give the X-Pro 2/3 a full experience as digital rangefinder, with manual focus, parallax correction and EXIF?
Haha! Fwiw, I love pineapple/pepperoni and that’s a fairly good analogy because I also love FUJI/LEICA and have owned about 8 different Fuji cameras and 8 different Leica cameras over the years. Everyone has a bias and a preference, thinking you could get a 100% completely blind objective comparison would be really really difficult.
@@benjhaisch haha yeah man I completely get it! I switched to fuji three years ago after 8 years of being with canon! I absolutely love fuji now, although I 100 percent will buy a Leica at somepoint! They all have their special quality’s!
I mean, that’s how it works, right? It’s all subjective unless you’re just looking at MTF charts or DXO scores. And even then, color and usage still come down to personal preference.
Well, if nothing else it reminded me that I was a fool for selling my Konica Hexar some years ago (no, not the RF. The original one with 'Ghost Mode') But it is fascinating where the discussions of beautiful rangefinders take us.... Used Leica. Used Zorki. Loved them both 😊
Having shot both systems, pretty much agree. The Fuji is the 80% solution and is more practical in many (maybe most) respects, but the Leica experience forever has my heart. It’s just unbelievably enjoyable to shoot.
If you compare prices of the camera body + 3 lenses(used): Fuji $2,500-4,000 vs Leica $9,000-15,000. If one was looking to start out or get into the Leica family, the Q2 would be your best path to see if it’s right for you ($3,500-4,500).
This video is amazing!!! I like your style a lot... on your videos We can actually see the cameras, specially this kind of classic, amazing, beautiful cameras!!!
I'm a Leica user with decades of film shooting with all the early models (M3, M2, M4) culminating with the classic M6, which is coming up on 30 years of use. However, I shoot Fujifilm for digital. My RF style model is the X-Pro2. I just can't justify the cost differential between Leica and Fujifilm. The results from the Fuji with good lenses (sorry, the lens in you video is not highly thought of in Fuji world) is at least equal to what I got on film with Summicrons on my M6. On dream for me... if Fuji made maybe two manual focus lenses with comprehensive DOF scales for zone and hyperfocal settings, say a 16mm and 23mm, I'd be very happy.
@@jeffreyb.1657 They do and I have both. The problem is that they don't stay put in a dynamic situation. With an old Leica lens, you can set a zone for street shooting and walk around for hours with the lens staying exactly where you set it. The Fujis are great when you wish to set a hyper focus or a zone for a specific shot, and then immediately take that shot. But the lens doesn't have the resistance in the focusing action to allow the zone you set to stay set when moving around.
The Fuji is the far more flexible machine. Not always important, of course. In a way, it can be seen as an M and a Q at the same time. Things you did not talk about: Flash and minimal focus distance. Fuji gives you HSS/TTL also with the likes of Godox and Profoto, and can use a flash AND the EVF at the same time. MFD of Leica lenses is mostly 70cm. If the odd lens can focus closer, the accessory finder needs to come out. One more comment on "Leicas hold their value better": Depends on how you look at it. Some rare limited editions do, of course. But a digital rangefinder loses about 1k - 1.5k a year. The 8k Leica M10 is now 4k in 2021. An XPRO2 went from 1.5k to maybe 500-600 USD at the same time span. Relatively speaking, the Leica still holds 50% of their full price and the Fuji only 33%. Absolutely speaking, the loss is 4k vs 1k.
It's not the camera that makes a great photograph, it's the vision of the photographer. Leica won't make you any better than a Rolls royce makes you a better driver or a Steinway piano makes ypu a better pianist. . This is a gear acquisition syndrome without common sense. The world's greatest photographers used a big box camera and incredible vision. Karsh, Adam's etc.
Hi Benj, IMHO shooting film with a Leica is a great experience that is not forcing me to regret not using my EOS1 but for digital I prefer my X-Pro3. Don’t you think that the love we have for our film experience with our M bodies and lenses tend to translate into the digital space without too good reasons? The only issue I have with Leica (film) + Fuji (digital) is consistency in muscle-memory.
I really like your videos but I don't get this comparison. A 5-6k full frame Leica vs a 1.3k APSC Fuji. I would expect the Leica to be better. I'd be shocked if it wasn't.
“More difficult experience” isn’t exactly right I would say. As long as you’re sure about the settings for light and using zone focus all you have to do is press the shutter. And there’s not AF point it has to find
Camera bodies use to be purely an interface, a handling experience, because film used to drive image quality (and optics of course). Leica was a top dog for that very reason and that continues today. Just now we have to deal with sensor output too that cant just be changed out with a different roll of film.
Hey great review! Fuji shooter here :) What impresses me about Leica is that the lenses are so small. Without compromising image quality. And I also like the colours a lot.
Special Note: The Fujifilm TX1 was really being the 1st (vs. Hasselblad X-Pan Panorama Camera), but due a Collaboration with Hasselblad, Hasselblad named the Camera "X-Pan", and later came the X-Pan2, the same way, after the Original Fujifilm TX2. Into the 80-90s, Fujifilm also had the "Texas Leica" Professional Cameras into various Format Sizes being avialable, which looked like a Leica, but due sheer Size, Texas Leica into the US, therefore. Fujifilm does have a long heritage with Medium Format, and also TV Lenses for the prof. Video Gear, being used into TV Studios. So the Fuji-Hasselblad Collaboration was quite ordinary, back into the heyday, the same way, Leica did it with Minolta (think Minolta CL, CLE Series - and the M-Mount Rokkor Lenses) /edit: 1st Sentence slightly updated into ( )
@@benjhaisch No. Not at all. The "actual functionality" is the bright line finder and what it means to one's entire approach to shooting. You use a different finger to focus the Fuji, that's all. The point of rangefinder focusing is to get focusing out of the way when it's near time to release the shutter. Both methods accomplish that. Or, you can use continuous autofocus on the Fuji and (maybe) set aside focusing concerns that way. It's foolish to be prideful about what focusing method is "more manual". John Henry vs the steam drill contests always end the same way.
I’ve never lost value with my m lenses. I’ve only bought used and after a few years all my lenses have actually appreciated. Something that can’t be said for other camera systems. Investments indeed.
Total agreement, ditto the bodies, and then not only the M ones, LTM (M39) bodies and glass are in extremely high demand and supply is dwindling, at least for the film models. However, you need to decide what is your camera for you, an investment or a tool. Much as I enjoy fondling and showing off my gear, the final result (aka image) is the real value. 😉
It is important to note that FF doesn't immediately better. The overall sharpness/print resolution is higher due to more lw/ph, but the dynamic range of the M10 vs the X-Trans 4 is actually almost identical.
Full sensor ok but the Fujifilm has the pixel density of an equivalent 58 MP camera hence in terms of resolution will probably reveal more details (using the same lens) than the Leica. Granted that one doesn't buy the Leica for the resolution and details... that is.
![Leica M10 vs Fujifilm X-Pro3 | The Best Digital Rangefinder [style] Cameras](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
